ROSHAN ALI vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 1243 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ROSHAN ALI VS State Ss. 3 & 4---Illegal possession of property etc.---Appreciation of evidence---Disputed land owned by the Government/Department--- Complainant alleged that the appellants forcibly occupied the MUHAG of land of complainant side and had unlawfully and illegally dispossessed the complainant from his land---Validity---Complainant as a witness, during cross-examination, stated that he did not know whether land in dispute was government land or otherwise, however, he voluntarily stated that it was MUHAGA land which was given to them ; he further stated that he did not know about any application submitted by him or his brother to concerned department to lease out the said land to him which was refused---Complainant, however, denied as to whether Irrigation Department lodged a FIR against one of the appellants on the basis that he had occupied the land of Irrigation Department and the case was pending before the Civil Judge---Said witness also stated during the cross-examination that he did not know about any notice issued by National Highway department against the said appellant/ accused to vacate the said land---Importantly, the complainant did not know as to whether land in dispute was leased out to them or not but he stated that they were cultivating the said land since their forefathers---Such aspect of the case clearly indicated that the complainant party was not the owner of disputed land and the possession thereof was also not lawful---Another witness from the complainant party, who was also claiming to be owner of the disputed land, had admitted in his cross-examination that the land which was in possession of the appellants (accused persons) was PAI land; he admitted the documents produced by him and that they were not lease documents---Said witness further admitted that the concerned SDO had submitted report to Executive Engineer stating therein that he had submitted application requesting therein to lease the land to him (said witness)---During the cross-examination said witness further admitted that he had not produced any title documents, record of rights or registered deed of land in dispute in the Court to show his ownership over the disputed land---Both the said witnesses claiming to be owners failed to produce any documents which stated that the land in dispute was leased out to them by any of the concerned departments or they were allowed to occupy the same---Yet another important witness from the complainant side was the concerned Tapedar who was authorized by the Mukhtiarkar for recording evidence in his examination-in-chief---Said witness deposed that the land in dispute was government property, which was situated adjacent to one bank of shakh i.e. Tara minor whereas land of complainant side was situated at opposite bank---During cross-examination of said witness the report of Mukhtiarkar was confronted to him after which he stated that it was mentioned in the report that Mukhtiarkar and the Tapedar again visited the site personally and found that the respondents (complainant side) had occupied the government land unlawfully by making katcha/pacca houses and they had no title document and the land in dispute was located in between the land pertaining to Irrigation Department and National Highway Authority---Said witness also admitted that the complainant had no title of said land and further admitted that complainant had no lease of the land---Trial Court had not evaluated the evidence in its true perspective and thus arrived at an erroneous conclusion by holding the appellants guilty of the offence---High Court set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants and acquitted them of the charge---Appeal, filed by the accused/convict persons was allowed, in circumstances.

ROSHAN ALI vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 1243 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR